Posted
by
timothy
on Tuesday May 21, 2013 @10:12AM
from the liberator-lite dept.

Just a few weeks after Cody Wilson and friends successfully fired an instance of their own 3-D printed handgun design, Sparrowvsrevolution writes, "a couple of Wisconsin hobbyist gunsmiths have already managed to adapt Defense Distributed's so-called Liberator firearm and print it on a $1,725 Lulzbot 3D printer, a consumer grade machine that's far cheaper than the industrial quality Stratasys machine Defense Distributed used. They then proceeded to record their cheaper gun (dubbed the 'Lulz Liberator') firing nine .380 rounds without any signs of cracking or melting. Eight of the rounds were fired from a single plastic barrel. (Defense Distributed only fired one through its prototype.) In total, the Lulz Liberator's materials cost around $25 and were printed over just 48 hours."

Both use a metal firing pin and are designed with the non-functional metal piece, the Lulz version also uses some screws for structural strength that would be much harder to replace with something non-metallic.

I think bullets and casings contain enough metal to set off most metal detectors anyways, though I'm already envisioning ways to bypass that.

There may be a way (composite round/casing), but you're going to be hard pressed to make firearm ammo that can bypass the scrutiny of trained gunpowder-sniffing dogs.

Paper cartridges with ceramic or stone payloads dipped twice in a clean hard wax doped with a little lavender oil ought to do the trick. You might have to press them in a mold after the second dip in order to get enough regularity for automatic feed, though, and you'd have to have something close to a clean room set up....

You'd be surprised, at the Atlanta Olympics we had a security breach and had to bomb sweep the building. Durring the sweep a piece of 2 inch diameter metal pipe that was 4 inches long and had a reducing nipple on it that was lost durring the building construction was found. I looked examined the pipe, saw that it was hollow (as opposed filled with explosives) and kept it. I carried that pipe through the mag-line, in my MOPP carrier for a week and a half with out any of the magnetometers going off. That pipe probably had enough metal to make a couple glocks

Metal detectors are really conductivity detectors. Most people think they can only detect iron, but they can detect anything that conducts electricity. Even a human body causes a small signal. A loop of carbon fiber would cause a very large signal. Poor anthropomorphized metal detector.

1) When going into a state courthouse. (Metal detector, but legally allowed to carry a gun anywhere but in the actual courtroom (with state permit to carry.))2) At the airport, but only about 25% of the time, and ONLY when "opting out" of the naked image scanners.

It's a lot easier and cheaper to just buy them second-hand out of the classified ads in the newspaper. I really don't understand why people think they have to 1) have millions of dollars in funding, 2) need fake passports and visas, 3) need to smuggle their weapons into a country already awash with them, 4) need to be willing to commit suicide to be effective. I blame Hollyweird to some extent, but mostly I think that people are just too stupid and lazy to spend 30 seconds to think about any of those points to realize how absurd they are.

You can't 3d print a spring with a plastics printer. You can't 3d print most of the mechanical components that make (semi)automatics work. It would essentially up the number of machined components up to a point that it would no longer really be a "3d printed gun" and more be a gun kit where you can provide the frame.

You want to take something like what they made in that video and use it as a recoil spring? First off, it was huge. It would have to be significantly reduced in size to fit in a weapon, making it a lot less useful. Additionally, it would need to be extremely more robust. Do you have any idea the magnitude of the force absorbed by the recoil spring or the speed with which it's expected to function?

I'm not saying it's impossible to print the mechanical equivalent of a set of springs for use in a semi-a

Despite it no longer being a "3d printed gun", it would still be a game changer in the sense that this would be a functional multi-shot gun that can be manufactured by pretty much anyone with access to a crappy consumer-grade printer, without requiring any gunsmithing, metal working or other mechanical skills. If you can assemble a simple Lego kit, you can put together such a gun.

The gap between cylinder and barrel might be problematic. An imperfectly aligned cylinder will increase wear and stress on any revolver, and a polymer frame revolvers have issues with frame ablation/cutting from the gasses coming out of the gap. The pepperbox concept would be a logical first step to avoid those issues which could prove catastrophic on an ABS barrel/frame revolver.

No, but neither is fertilizer when you get down to it. I'm about to go on a tirade for a position that isn't really even mine:Gun control is about impulsive people.

You're never going to stop a McVeigh of Bin Laden with gun control. They're meticulous planners who will not be impeded by inconveniences, and will work around them. They'll build their own materials, circumvent safety control systems, and seek to maximize damage. Those people aren't the most common problem. Their problem is that they are certain that their cause is just.

The most common thread in criminals, particularly murderers, is poor impulse control and emotional volatility. People kill because they get angry, or desperate. 3/4 of people who attempt suicide will be deterred by a simple obstacle or obstruction in their way. People being rational don't murder. Gun control is about limiting the ease with which someone can engage in irrational acts.

no, he is making a valid point. Mental health program budgets have been slashed and many of the people that have gone on to spree kill were identified or asked for help, but the system was not capable of helping them.

It does appear that the goal is not to reduce crime, though that is used as a statistic. I do agree that the banning of guns appears to be an end on its own for these people. It makes little sense. There is an irrational fear, probably instilled at an early age. It is similar to the irrational fear that other people have towards people instead of objects. I think it is the same base motivation, and the separate groups each see their cause as just. It doesn't mean they both aren't delusional though.

Its because everything else the conservatives believe in is so ridiculous, they just assume the right to bear arms is just has terrible. The right to bear arms is literally the only thing the conservatives get even remotely right.

Most self labeled liberals are not truly liberal in the classical sense, they are merely anti-conservative.

It's a lot easier to take away guns from irrational people than it is to get them to control their impulses. When you figure out how to get irrational people to control their impulses, let me know.

I don't know where you get the idea that gun banners don't care about addressing the base cause of violent crime. The people who led the effort were doctors who got tired of having people dying from gun wounds in the emergency room. They were happy to reduce violence any way they could do it. The easiest way was to start by taking away the guns.

They're the same people who are trying to reduce poverty, increase education, etc. but that's a long, indirect path.

Then maybe, just maybe, we ought to be working on helping the irrational rather than banning inanimate objects that can do nothing at all on their own.

But you know what? It will never happen, because the gun banners DON"T CARE about addressing the base cause of violent crime, they just want to ban guns. Period.

The solution is simple. Make guns illegal for all men, and legal for all women. Then you can have your protection, and keep the guns out of the hands of the vast majority of violent criminals. As long as you always have an armed girlfriend/wife with you, that is. Touch that gun though, and an electric shock ends your life!

did you even read it? as all? can you read? are you just blindly linking cause some else who didn't read it told you it was bad?

Are you stupid?

His fine has to do with the 3 unregistered weapons he had. Normally he would go to jail, but since he saved the child he is just getting the fine.This is reasonable.From the article you didn't bother to read:"As part of the agreement, Benjamin Srigley, 39, was required to pay a $1,000 fine but will not have criminal charges filed against him for the three unregistered firearms and the ammunition that investigators found in his possession, said Ted Gest, a spokesman for the office of the attorney general.

“We took it into account that he saved this boy’s life,” Mr. Gest said.Possession of an unregistered firearm or ammunition in the District is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine, and prosecutors said Mr. Srigley could have faced up to seven criminal charges in the case.

You do realize you are spouting off the slippery slope FALLACY, correct?You have become the gun lobby's bitch. well done.Oh no! something scary might happen even though we have no proof! whelp, that's enough for me herp derp.

FTA: " Over the course of its test firing, Joe and Guslick say it misfired several times, and some of its screws and its firing pin had to be replaced. After each firing, the ammo cartridges expanded enough that they had to be pounded out with a hammer."

This story isn't about 3D printing weapons at home, it's about people doing things that make all people with hobbyist 3D printers at home (myself included) look like gun-nut-freaks to the general public (before that it was just pretty nerdy). The first time I mentioned my printer to my mother, she told me about some cop show (CSI, Criminal Minds?) episode she'd seen the previous night where the killer had 3D printed his handgun to get it through security. This has now become the primary thing that the general public associates with 3D printers. It's sad.

weapon smugglers won't need to smuggle weapons any longer. Just smuggle the printer and the raw materials. What will become more valuable will be the specs for any new weapon design. Welcome to the future....

I wouldn't be surprised if some type of DRM appeared on printers to prevent this, similar to the algorithm in color copiers which at best locks up a copier, at worst phones home, if someone places a dollar or Euro on the glass and hits copy.

The DRM could look for blueprint designs by hash, or certain "gun-like" items.

This could easily become law in days.

Of course, it will result in a cat and mouse game, but in a cat and mouse game, the cat almost always wins.

Even assuming that such DRM were feasible to implement, it still could not stop people from printing guns which do not conform to legal standards in the first place, but may still be entirely functional.

Of course, I expect that once this is fully realized, home manufacturing of any kind, without some sort of license and thus subject to regular inspection, is I'm afraid likely to be outlawed in the not too distant future.

I wouldn't be surprised if some type of DRM appeared on printers to prevent this

3D-printers are actually pretty easy to build even at home and if you build one of your own there wouldn't be any sort of a DRM.

The DRM could look for blueprint designs by hash, or certain "gun-like" items.

Impossible. There is no way for the printer or the software to know what the parts will be used for. There is no universal definition for "gun-like" as even a simple, straight tube would be "gun-like."

Of course, it will result in a cat and mouse game, but in a cat and mouse game, the cat almost always wins.

Sorry for the digression, but real predator-prey dynamics are more complicated than that. Predators are far short of 100% efficient (citation needed; I am lazy!), and predator and prey populations are interdependent [wikipedia.org]. I can only speculate about the analogy to regulation and disobedience, but it seems possible that it still holds up. There could be the same back-and-forth between the success of regulators and the success of those who circumvent or evade the regulation.

according to the guys they claim the usual home printer abs is stronger than the stratasys abs+.though it wouldn't be that far fetched to believe the stratasys just uses it so they can keep tighter stranglehold on the consumables..

In 1994 a friend and I assembled a.22 from hardware store pipe, a hacksaw, a drill, some nails, and springs. It had a hammer and a trigger. We followed no plans...we just knew you needed a barrel, and something to smack the rim of the bullets we had...and we improvised. It worked fine, but you have to unscrew the barrel to to reload its single shot.

In 1994 a friend and I assembled a.22 from hardware store pipe, a hacksaw, a drill, some nails, and springs. It had a hammer and a trigger. We followed no plans...we just knew you needed a barrel, and something to smack the rim of the bullets we had...and we improvised

The reason a 3D printed gun is a big deal is because it cannot be tracked. Normal weapons made for consumers and the military have unique tracking characteristics such as the number of rifle ridges in the barrel, the position of the firing pin, etc. These signatures can be used by law enforcement to track down the type of weapon used in a crime -- if not the exact brand and model, then at least the approximate style and manufacture of the gun. The forensic marks on a bullet can be compared to rounds fire

At that point, it becomes more of a parenting issue than a gun control issue.

I don't have guns in my house, but I still taught my kids basic gun safety using water pistols. They know not to point at anything they don't intend to shoot, and to always treat a gun as if it were loaded and ready for firing.

In the words of Dr. Seuss..."it's fun to have fun, but you have to know how."

It may be a fun proof of concept, but about the only things it is good for are generating political hype and drawing attention to the inventors.

People fail to realize that it's much easier and cheaper to make a home made gun using existing tools and materials. Just because someone now made a [not very good] one using a 3D printer, everybody seems to be freaking out.

Further well-grounded and thoughtful discussion on the matter can be found here:

Is this a gun, as in a fully functional and useful tool? No. But it's not proof of any kind that 3d guns are impractical in principle (as that Register article claims); quite the contrary. The Liberator proved that it's possible to print a gun that can be fired (unreliably) on a printer, without blowing up. The Lulz version proves it is possible to create one that can be fired repeatedly, and can be created on a consumer grade printer. From here on in the reliability will improve, and perhaps someone will come up with a double barreled one or a six-shooter even.

This development is not interesting for gun enthusiasts. It may be interesting for people who need to smuggle a gun past security (you still need to get the metal parts + cartridges through the detector). It's not that interesting for people with the skills, tools and smarts to build their own gun, nor is it for criminals who can (in most countries) quite simply acquire a gun from an illegal source. But it is very interesting for people who want to acquire a gun illegally, not necessarily because they want to use it for criminal purposes, but in case they want one to defend themselves but the gov't doesn't let them have one.

And for that purpose, you wouldn't really need something that can reliably fire 10.000 rounds. 6 reliable shots would already be a vast improvement over nothing at all. And given the progress already made on these printers, I'd say that printing and assembling such a gun by anyone may well be viable in a few years.

Everyone is freaking out like before this you needed to be God himself to create a firearm. How long does it take a gunsmith to build a gun from scratch? Compare that to the time it takes to design one in AutoCAD or whatever and then 3D print it and assemble it. It's probably pretty comparable and the metal one doesn't look like a bad sci fi prop. I bet I could design a working rifle that would fire a couple bullets from a trip to the hardware store, or especially a shotgun! You need a barrel, aka steel pipe. Then a handle so solder/glue basically anything on. Then you need an end cap with a semi-sealed firing pin to strike the bullet so a piece of scrap metal and a spring. Tada, gun (at about the same reliability level).

Until then I am not impressed. So you can print a plastic tube with a handle. Wow. Now for the trip to a "hardware store" to buy some bullets. Oh wait, I am not in USA, there are no bullets for general sale here, unless you are a registered gun owner.

I don't get the obsession with using 3D printing for guns. Other than the fact that it sounds cool and futuristic, it seems inferior to CNC-machining in just about every way. It's not even cheaper; you could buy a pretty decent hobbyist CNC machine for less than the $1725 that this 3D printer cost. And it's unlikely that cost gap will change significantly, since 3D printers need many of the same components (precise linear guidance rails and stepper motors) that CNC machines do.

Tyranny is already here. It is just masked in Bureaucracy. All you need to know is that the Powers that be, have already targeted "enemies of the state", simply because they oppose the Bureaucracy's over reaching power.

Let's see.... Nothing you posted was actually what your article said. None of it. It varies between misrepresentation to outright lie. Why can't you just use the truth in your arguments? Really? I know there's problems. Everyone knows there's problems. Making stuff up just makes you look legitimately paranoid.

1. Misrepresentation(A crime was committed, but it wasn't that, paranoid confirmation bias at work)2. Outright fabrication3. Was with a warrant, so no.4. Being sued with a claim doesn't make it true. The complaint includes accusations that representatives were "rude". Really?5. That's not what happened and that's pretty clearly intentionally a misrepresentation of the investigation's purpose, and only reflects your paranoia. I cannot understand how you'd possibly misconstrue the purpose that far, other than paranoia.6. Oh no, someone has an opinion that's different than yours. And she's a politician. That's tyranny.

Christ this post is just doubling down on intentionally misreading everything. I used to be sympathetic about the damned IRS thing until everyone started pretending it meant something besides what happened.

Nope. Nothing will change as a result of these poor quality, single shot, plastic 3D printed guns. Not in Africa, not nowhere.

Before piling onto the 3D printed gun hype bandwagon, think about the practical aspects of deplying these toy guns for any purpose, besides messing around in your basement with your 3D printer and CAD software.

The fundamental tenet of the gun rights advocates is that, armed citizenry will take down tyrannical governments.

No, the fundamental tenet of gun rights advocates is that self-defense, which includes the right to own the tools of self-defense, is a basic human right. That fact remains true whether tyrants can survive armed populations or not.

Now it is true as a matter of history that one point the "Founding Fathers" considered was that a nation that relied on a militia (armed and trained body of citizens)

If you are fighting a rebellion, a chemist and physicist would be much more useful that a 3d printer, unless you intend to drop the 3D printer on someone. This is the funny thing about gun people. They seem to think the gun gives them a magic shield that will protect them from everything, even the well armed FBI, or despotic government that is willing to use air strikes against civilians, or Rand Paul who wants to use drones against robbery suspects.

From what I have heard they run about $20 in the markets. One of my cousins was over in that area with the US military and they all received stern warning upon arrival not to acquire one of the cheap AKs as they couldn't bring it home and would end up in a metric ton of trouble with their COs. Being a good person my cousin didn't attempt it even though he probably could have gotten away with it.

Yes. Anybody with a cheap Harbor Freight welder and Chinese 7" mini lathe can produce a gun. Total cost of the tools is about 1/2 that of the Lulz 3D printer, and you'd be able to make actual guns, not these fragile plastic toys that everybody is losing their shit over.

What is to stop someone from using those components rigging them up to some sort of CNC system and then downloading plans. the simple repetitive motion of welding a good bead is something a computer could do with ease as would be the motions for working the lathe. You could take it farther and do the same for the small 3 axis mill as well. Granted the cheap Harbor Freight welder might have reliability issues (looked at getting one but the reviews indicated that it was kind of a crap shoot) but even a nice s

The NRA still does a lot of firearms education and training. The rabid anti-gun folks stand in the way of these efforts at every opportunity however. Firearms-related accidents are good for the anti-gun agenda

Now, try attending a city council or school board meeting and proposing that you have the NRA come in and give a firearms safety presentation to the school kids.

In many places, people will be screaming at the top of their lungs at the idea of having anything NRA-related coming anywhere near the schools.

The NRA didn't suddenly get "whacked out" and shift its focus. The 1960s is when the big push for new federal anti-gun legislation came along. The last thing the federal government wanted at the time was a bunch of well armed black people demanding equality.